Voor Marthe was het duidelijk. Vrije wil hing af van anderen. Als je voor jezelf kookt, denk je wat je zelf het lekkerst vindt. Kook je voor gasten, dan stem je dat met anderen af. Henk vondt dat naar mate je ouder wordt je je vrije wil beter kon volgen.
Maar grappig genoeg kwamen we aan het eind van de avond op een ander resultaat. Henk II vind dat je altijd de pad van de liefde moet volgen, anders is het zinloos en is er geen waarheid. Dat betekent, dat er dan geen vrije wil is. En Henk III zij dat je keuzes afhingen van je onderbewust, (het experiment met de MRI en de beelder die een proefpersoon te zien kregen- vervolgens moesten ze links of rechts met de hand drukken- de MRI kon laten zien dat de beslissing al ruime tijd voor het drukken in de hersenen was gebuurt)...daarom is daar dan ook geen vrije wil,...maar je wordt als het ware geleidt. Aukje zij dat het waarschijnlijk om intuitie ging en daar kon Simone zich ook in vinden. Zij zij dat deze intuitie dan waarschijnlijk zoiets is als het goddelijke.
Henk wist niet of hij het daar helemaal me eens kon zijn. Hij verhuegt zich op de pensioen waar hij eindelijk doen kan wat hij wil.;-) VRIJ!
Radsha - onze nieuwe gast - zij dat het om een drie dingen ging. De zelf wil, de dienende wil en uiteindelijk om de goddelijke wil. Als deze drie weer bij elkaar zijn,....dan hebben we: EENHEID. en daar gaat het altijd om. he he...
vrijdag 3 december 2010
Graancircels
27 oktober 2010
Dat was een woensdag. Uitzondering. en het thema was ook niet van mij gekozen, maar van Henk III. Uitzondering. We waren met 10 mensen en de meesten waren zeer enthousiast over de blaadjes, die Henk liet zien. Ongeloovelijk groot en mooi. Ik kan dat niet makkelijk hier in woorden vatten. Zoiets moet je zien en wellicht nog beter,...je moet er een keer zijn.
Toen Henk met de verklaring UFO kwam had ik persoonlijk mijn reservaties. Ik zij toen ik aan het eind naar mijn meening werdt gevraagd, dat ik het jammer vindt dat zo veel energie naar het "buiten de aarde" ging. Ik vind ONZE MOEDER AARDE ZOOOOO mooi en bijzonder. Daarom vind ik het niet aantrekkelijk om gedachtes aan buiten deze planeet levende wezens te verspillen.
De laatste keer zij Simone, dat ze net in de buurt van de graancircels was geweest en ze had een interessante gedachte.
Wellicht komen deze onverklaarbare graancircels niet van buitenaardse wezens, maar wellicht doet moeder aarde het zelf. Ik was net binnen gekomen toen ze me dit vertelde en ik zat nog niet. Ik kreeg koude rillingen over mijn rug.-- niet een keer, nee: een paar keer...dan moet dat waar zijn, toch ;-)
Dat was een woensdag. Uitzondering. en het thema was ook niet van mij gekozen, maar van Henk III. Uitzondering. We waren met 10 mensen en de meesten waren zeer enthousiast over de blaadjes, die Henk liet zien. Ongeloovelijk groot en mooi. Ik kan dat niet makkelijk hier in woorden vatten. Zoiets moet je zien en wellicht nog beter,...je moet er een keer zijn.
Toen Henk met de verklaring UFO kwam had ik persoonlijk mijn reservaties. Ik zij toen ik aan het eind naar mijn meening werdt gevraagd, dat ik het jammer vindt dat zo veel energie naar het "buiten de aarde" ging. Ik vind ONZE MOEDER AARDE ZOOOOO mooi en bijzonder. Daarom vind ik het niet aantrekkelijk om gedachtes aan buiten deze planeet levende wezens te verspillen.
De laatste keer zij Simone, dat ze net in de buurt van de graancircels was geweest en ze had een interessante gedachte.
Wellicht komen deze onverklaarbare graancircels niet van buitenaardse wezens, maar wellicht doet moeder aarde het zelf. Ik was net binnen gekomen toen ze me dit vertelde en ik zat nog niet. Ik kreeg koude rillingen over mijn rug.-- niet een keer, nee: een paar keer...dan moet dat waar zijn, toch ;-)
dinsdag 2 november 2010
30 September 2010 - Mystieke ervaringen
Wie was er allemaal?
Simone, Joop, Henk. Annette, Aukje, Henk II, Henk, Marthe en ik
Thema : Mystiek en mystieke ervaringen
Ten eerste lieten we iedereen eerste associatieve geadachtes en ervaringen uiten om vervolgens bij een gemeenschappelijke kern te komen.
Henk II startte met een soort definitie. Mystiek heeft te maken met stilte. Het gaat om een bepaalde ervaring, waar we geen meningen meer hebben. Een soort: alleen maar aanwezig zijn,…alleen aandacht voor de dingen die er zijn, of in andere woorden contact maken met mijn eigen bron en dat geeft dan een gevoel van euforie – er is iets goddelijks…in de praktijk wil dat zeggen, dat we ons bijvoorbeeld niet ergeren als we in de file staan. Henk voegde er ook nog het verschijnsel van fluisteren in een oude kathedraal aan toe. Op bepaalde plekken ervaren we een soort verbondenheid,…en dat kan ons stil maken.
Simone moest aan voorbeelden uit de natuur denken, maar het was meer dan dat. Soms was het te vergelijken met een gevoel dat alles zo had moeten zijn…”dat alles op zijn plek valt”. Alsof je ineens alle inzicht hebt. Voor haar is het een soort EENHEIDSGEVOEL, en ook iets waar ze het gevoel heeft ineens alle inzicht te hebben. Ze voelt zich dan verbonden met alles. Is dat een religie vroeg ze zich af ?
Bij Henk III ging het om iets wat tijdloos was. “Hetgeen wat er is en wat er altijd zal zijn”. Hij kwam met het voorbeeld, dat als je iets moois ziet, vallen je gedachtes stil….er ontstaat ruimte voor het tijdloze. En vanuit zijn persoonlijk leven wist hij te vertellen dat hij een ‘buiten zijn lichaam’ ervaring had,…waar hij als 14 jarige buiten zijn lichaam zweefde en zich van boven zag. Er was geen emotie, →niets. Maar zodra er emotie bij kwam,…ongeacht of die nu positief of negatief was,…daalde hij weer neer in zijn lichaam…en was zijn ‘buiten vanuit het heelal ervaring’ weer over. Bij de christelijke mystieke ervaringen van Franz van Assisi voegde hij eraan toe dat FvA voor hem geen goed voorbeeld was, omdat hij als 40 jaar oude man stierf, omdat hij met blote voeten over de Alpen liep en ziek werd. Dus deze man die blijkbaar met dieren kon praten betekende voor hem geen voorbeeld van een goed mens en mysticus.
Henk I vertelde dat hij vroeger kon voorspellen of een kind een meisje of een jonge zou worden. Voor hem was dat een voorbeeld van iets mystieks, omdat het niet met ratio verklaarbaar is. En misschien ligt bij dit voorbeeld ook een soort eenheidsverbondenheid met het all ten grondslag. Henk ziet ook iets mystieks in wat we krijgen, als we met een ander hetzelfde gevoel delen. Hij noemt dat liefde.
Voor Annette was het een soort mystieke ervaring als zij aan een vriendin dacht en die in datzelfde uur later opbelde. Zij vind dat mystieke ervaringen grensverleggend zijn.
Aukje praatte veel over gevoel en intuitie. Voor haar was gevoeligheid in haar leven belangrijker geworden. Zij voelt sferen en kan op een avond bij iemand gewoon weglopen, als de energie voor haar vuil is. Ze zegt ook dat zij mystiek wil verbinden met het aardse.
Joop had een zeer ontnuchterende benadering voor het thema mystiek. Voor hem was het glashelder dat het gewoon een feit was, waar je met vragen en problemen zat. Hij noemde het : Het is een van de tikken van onze tijd. Hij meende ook dat als mensen met religie verbonden zouden zijn, zij geen behoefde zouden hebben aan mystiek.→ De antwoord van Henk III op deze opmerking bracht Joop wellicht aan het twijfelen. Namelijk dat de grondslagen van de christelijke religie diepgaand waren en juist met mystiek begonnen. De vader – de zoon – de heilige geest en zo voort, lopen over water, een zee in tweeën delen en water in de woestijn vinden voor een heel volk.
Henk III voegde hier ook nog MARIA aan toe en al die heilig verklaarde mensen, allemaal heilig vanwege mystieke ervaringen en daden…Henk zij dat hij de volgende keer een boek over graancirkels mee wilde brengen.
Henk II gaf ook aan, dat hij bij mystiek aan de meest belangrijke vraag van ze allemaal moest denken, namelijk: Wie ben ik ? En er kwam via een andere associatie ook de connectie met de aardse leij lijnen. Hij gaf uitleg over de meridianen van onze aarde en dat die net zoals de meridianen van de mens gemeten konden worden. Hij noemde als de meest bijzondere plekken op aarde ENGELAND, JERUSALEM, en TIBET,…En hij voegde eraan toe dat het onbespreekbare, niet uitgesproken kon worden, en dat het voor iedereen anders was.
donderdag 12 augustus 2010
Good and...17th June 2010
Welcome to this blog of thursday philosophy on the 7th of June 2010
That evening in June was different, I heard from the participants. It was more about laughter and thinking deeply at the same time.
Aukje, the three Henks, Marthe, Simone, Ingrid, Erik, Joop and myself were there in the pittoresque place of center Delft. Coffee and thea were served and we enjoyed the flowers of the garden before we started.
I am not sure how succesful I was with bringing in the 'new' value of "listening carefully "--- all packed up in a latin classic parcel. That wants to say : I came with that proudly invented word of 're-auscultare' (meaning listening back or again or giving more time to what was just said ) in comparrison to re-spect (meaning looking back...etc). My intention was to encourage everyone to question others and getting deeper into thoughts of someone else and deeply understand what the otherone means, thinks and believes. i.e. SLOWING THINGS DOWN A BIT AND WORKING ON SLOW THOUGHTS - DEEP MEANING. I would say to my own mirror : nice try....and I'll remind you again...Of course I can suggest my issues of value in a philosophical discussion and of course it is a development that takes time and patience. OK then, enough about myself:...let's start with reporting about the evening.
OUR TOPIC: GOOD AND...
Actually one would say this is unfinished and not a real topic at all. And that is exactly my point. The interest came to lie upon the opposite of 'good' or on the other hand --- something that relates to it.
So this blog is really short. I am francly just going to list the thoughts and believes that were mentioned that evening and next time we will see what it all means because one of our attendants already suggested that we continue this series of topics with : What does it all mean in practical terms ? Or in other words : What does GOODNESS/KINDNESS it mean in real life ?
GOOD:
good and wrong/false/bad
integer, lovingly, nice, kind
oneness and duality
Good and God
Good and Karma / creation / reincarnation
The question of what is really good, a good human heart, kindness was apparently not so easy to answer. Why ? Well,..."it depends on so many things", was the answer. It depends on where you are on this globe. For example if you eat pork in a society where it is considered to be wrong,...what kind of feeling do you get...??. Is being good then something that is being learned and depends totally on the society which we grow up in ? On the other hand it is also something that is dependent on time issues: Henk said for instance that he knew perfectly well what was good when he was young but the older he gets the more he doubts this fixed set of beliefs and conditions in which we live. In that sense goodness is also relative.
But then again we all agreed on the fact that there is a common universal goodness. In Ingrid's example of her father who acted against the orders of politics and against his police code followed his human heart by not locking up jews before and during the second WW, we all agreed that it was a GOODNESS, - an ethic code that was so pure and natural...we were all very happy to hear that story. A very practical story that serves as an example for a GOOD action. Her father decided to flee to Switzerland because he could not follow higher orders from authorities. His heart decided.
Henk II talked more of theoretical goodness that came out of a stillness. This stillness he said was universal and apparent in every human being.
As an opposite oppinion came Eric with the question of people and alcohol. It is a known fact that drunken people sometimes respond with aggressive behaviour. And we all know that "children and drunkards speak the truth" from their inner core...Is that the same core of identity where Henk II spoke of,...that stillness?
Ingrid also talked about a set of references...that show one the way of being good and Aukje said that there was pure intuition that shows you the way. Simone agreed on that and said that you feel it when someting is GOOD. Erik also joined this comment by saying that GOODNESS had more to do with 'feeling' than with words or thoughts.
Interculturally seen there are also differencies that matter. BELIEFE, HOPE and LOVE are not always the same...according to Joop.
SO does that mean that GOODNESS is not universal after all ???
We referred to the codes of references again : and interestingly enough it is the ten commandments of the Bibel, the Koran, Buddhism with its ways and of course Hinduism has also its own rituals and ways to make sure that GOODNESS grows to make this world a better place for our following generation and our own lives.
More than that... it is not something that refers to all the religions in the worlds it is an overall understanding of love....which love ?
Unconditional love....and yes ! What is that again? It is something that we can see in mother's eyes when they look at their newborn...another word that hits it : the BUDDHA look...smiling with this everlasting love and giving eyes,...forgiving every little disrespectfulness and understanding that nobody is perfect....just believing in this CORE of goodness this absolute center of a ball of golden sunshine within every human soul. Total relaxation.
Next time we want to find out : How do you bring all this wisdom into everyday life?
donderdag 27 mei 2010
On may 20th the topic of our philosophical café had again something to do with LIFE. We wanted to go on,...there was more to share and more to find out together. Simone, Erik, Henk I,II, an III, Aukje, Joop, Marthe and myself sat around the table.
The question was : "Why is there life ?"
For those who have not that much time to read this blog...we did not come up with one answer ;-(. Let's say it was a conglomeration of different oppinions and sometimes two or three people met somewhere in the middle, shared the same thought or feeling. We have believers in the group and others who are very rational. There are people who have a rather pessimistic world view and others who think this is a wonderful world...it is striking that one can notice this fact mirrored in what and how they say it during the evening.
Erik started off with a definition : Life was something organic,...there was no big calculator yet there were rules that organisms followed....
Of course that was not an answer to the question of WHY!!! I kept repeating that simple single word the whole evening...I think that is the only way of reminding everyone of the center of the topic. It is ohh so tempting to talk about related topics and let your thoughts wander around.
Henk III without any further connotation to what Erik had said gave his view of WHY. He talked in the I-form and it was clear to him that he lived to answer one single question, namingly : WHO am I? SO for him the WHY question turned into another question...
Simone also came with a definition : she wanted to share her thought of "breathing and living": ...for her everthing that breathes has life and is alive...
THE BREATH of LIFE :
That notion of breathing left us in a beautiful mindset,...we all had connotations to that. Henk I added : "I sometimes wonder if we come back again..."
In other words he wandered about reïncarnation...and when our breath leaves our body where is our mind,...the spirit ?
What happens in a person when he or she starts drifting into another mindset,...away from the actual topic,...Sometimes these moments need to happen and I let go. I find it interesting as some of these moments change someone. What? Well, maybe these are moments in time when you start believing,...this certain feeling of:'I sometimes wonder,...do we come back'? These thoughts have nothing to do with science and do not refer to any book which Henk I has just read,...it is a wondering impuls leading to another level. It is the opening of a door to one's hidden self. Asking oneself these questions and sharing them brings the group together, ...if they really listen.(!) And really listening means allowing a silence after one has said something. Allowing a new thought or piece of information to nestle into our own synaptic windings,...to let them enter into our heart if you want.
Henk II was also captivated by the thought and word of breath : He came up with PRANA or cosmic energy, that was always at the center of our breathing.
Here I wanted to go into some detail : What are we talking about? Breathing in or breathing out ?
Simone is convinced that they are ONE,...they belong together,...in and out.
Aukje said she felt there was this clear distinction between breathing in, when you accept everything from the outside cosmic world and breathing out, when you give something from yourself.
Erik noted that breathing in was the YIN factor and out the YANG factor,...
Summing it up: "Why life ?" cannot be answered without talking about breath.
Now after this worming up we actually started the real philosophy. Walking and talking your way around in the maze finding ones way into the center of the maze and out. (symbolically speaking)
The following conversation can be divided into categories.
1) Some people preferred to answer the question with an individual understanding,...others
2)were clearly more interested in answering the why question out of the perspective of all people together
3) and we also had a universal aproach in which spirituality and the question of WHY LIFE reach up to the GODS and back
As a very compelling example I remember Henk III with the story of Brahman : Brahman (or God) came into existance out of nothing and was ONE. Yet a desire to get to know him (herself) split him/her up. Out of the unity there was duality...
Aukje thought of the survival of our humankind. She was convinced that you could apply the survival of the fittest idea as an answer,...there was this selection and you could also see that in the economy. But now nature was fighting back as human kind had taken too much from nature.
Why are we here,...why is there life ? Because we must see who the winner is? Who is the fittest...Leaves me with the question : and then? What if we ever had a winner,....? What would happen to him or her? What would they do, say, preach or teach? Would life just end there and then?
Simone came with a very interesting thought. She started off with telling us that she did not know the answer. That was refreshing in the sense that it made space in people's head. People felt a blank space... an opening. If we are too full with our own thoughts there is not much room left for others or for real listening and sharing.
So what was her answer: we are here on earth in order to learn...from experience from choices,..things that happen to us that we have to accept...if individuals learn the world learns and turns with us,...in other words: The world as a whole develops if we learn...into a positive direction.
What a wonderful positive attitude and way to look at things. The question remains WHY? Why should we learn ?
And after very intensly repeating that question I heard an answer : Because there is some use in it. OK. SO that means there is a reason...and finally someone came up with the answer : It is all about wisdom....
What a good moment for a break...\\/\\\
After the break Henk II came with some interesting wisdom: For him it was clear that we had to reach some sort of perfection. Coming from a state of ignorance our path was clear...we need to reach perfection by reaching our own core. Like the center of an onion we need to find out who we truly are. We can also say that we need to make aquantance with the person that we are not. "Everything you see you cannot be."
HIII immediately commented on this: "But you need a whole life time for this!"
HII you can call it the divine spark.
When Aukje asked if that was the inner God in Henk II he replied that he did not want to name it.
Simone commented that if you get to that inner core of yourself, there is this emptiness...
HenkII There is emptiness and fullness,....knowing and not knowing,...answer and no answer
But was there not a reason to live on this planet to share it with others for this earth asked Simone.
Henk II replied that he did embrace the world,...it was an inner attitude.
Henk III remarked that HenkI was too fast. Everything that he said marked the end of a learning proces and we were right at the beginning.
Then Aukje replied that for her it was like a train. We learn and we travel in that train of life and somethimes it stops and we can step out and wait for the next train till we are ready for our following destination.
Joop was interested in the question wether this train only went ahead....was there an evolutionary thought behind it ?
TRYING to PULL the group back to the main topic : WHY is there life ?
Simone had a very interesting thought to share: If there was ever more knowledge/wisdom and awareness then the path to more UNITY is ready. It all was about ONENESS. Coming to each other to find more peace and harmony.
Erik saw a completely different aspect of the WHY question: He sees the world as a very fragile planet also because there are too many people and ever more people to be fed. In his eyes people were here to colonies this planet.
HenkIII agreed on this one. It was all about living according to instincts, people only thinking in their own reproduction. Henk thought that overpopulation was a taboo topic but that it was of course a risk for planet earth. But of course that was not the topic of the evening...But what he said about our topic made sense: Henk talked about balance. Balance with the world as a goal and answer to WHY we are on this planet and also a certain unity with oneself and the world around us.
Marthe said that she saw life also a teacher. She was incredibly greatful for what she can still do in life,...playing the piano for example. With this answer we would be back at the answer : Why are we here ? IN ORDER TO LEARN...!!!
There is some regularity in life and it is necessary to see this and to live with it (Henk II)...may we say to go with the flow?
Overall the discussion was very pleasant and we shared a lot of laughter and we heard many oppinions...the thing for me to improve maybe is to learn (!) to make people listen even better to what the other has just said so that we can build up argument instead of starting new thoughts with every new speaker.
The challenge for next time : Will we be able to make space for someone else's story without bringing in our own backpack of thoughts and experiences...or will that then be half the fun...?
What I will try to do next time when we are going to talk about "The good the bad and the... " is to really make people repeat what the other one has said....we are going to get deeper and deeper into each other's minds. We are going to take each other ever more seriously...we are going to understand each other ever better...we will learn to be more gentle with each other. And we are going to do it slowly....because a mind that rushes too fast can easily lose track of others.
Till then, thursday philosophy.
The question was : "Why is there life ?"
For those who have not that much time to read this blog...we did not come up with one answer ;-(. Let's say it was a conglomeration of different oppinions and sometimes two or three people met somewhere in the middle, shared the same thought or feeling. We have believers in the group and others who are very rational. There are people who have a rather pessimistic world view and others who think this is a wonderful world...it is striking that one can notice this fact mirrored in what and how they say it during the evening.
Erik started off with a definition : Life was something organic,...there was no big calculator yet there were rules that organisms followed....
Of course that was not an answer to the question of WHY!!! I kept repeating that simple single word the whole evening...I think that is the only way of reminding everyone of the center of the topic. It is ohh so tempting to talk about related topics and let your thoughts wander around.
Henk III without any further connotation to what Erik had said gave his view of WHY. He talked in the I-form and it was clear to him that he lived to answer one single question, namingly : WHO am I? SO for him the WHY question turned into another question...
Simone also came with a definition : she wanted to share her thought of "breathing and living": ...for her everthing that breathes has life and is alive...
THE BREATH of LIFE :
That notion of breathing left us in a beautiful mindset,...we all had connotations to that. Henk I added : "I sometimes wonder if we come back again..."
In other words he wandered about reïncarnation...and when our breath leaves our body where is our mind,...the spirit ?
What happens in a person when he or she starts drifting into another mindset,...away from the actual topic,...Sometimes these moments need to happen and I let go. I find it interesting as some of these moments change someone. What? Well, maybe these are moments in time when you start believing,...this certain feeling of:'I sometimes wonder,...do we come back'? These thoughts have nothing to do with science and do not refer to any book which Henk I has just read,...it is a wondering impuls leading to another level. It is the opening of a door to one's hidden self. Asking oneself these questions and sharing them brings the group together, ...if they really listen.(!) And really listening means allowing a silence after one has said something. Allowing a new thought or piece of information to nestle into our own synaptic windings,...to let them enter into our heart if you want.
Henk II was also captivated by the thought and word of breath : He came up with PRANA or cosmic energy, that was always at the center of our breathing.
Here I wanted to go into some detail : What are we talking about? Breathing in or breathing out ?
Simone is convinced that they are ONE,...they belong together,...in and out.
Aukje said she felt there was this clear distinction between breathing in, when you accept everything from the outside cosmic world and breathing out, when you give something from yourself.
Erik noted that breathing in was the YIN factor and out the YANG factor,...
Summing it up: "Why life ?" cannot be answered without talking about breath.
Now after this worming up we actually started the real philosophy. Walking and talking your way around in the maze finding ones way into the center of the maze and out. (symbolically speaking)
The following conversation can be divided into categories.
1) Some people preferred to answer the question with an individual understanding,...others
2)were clearly more interested in answering the why question out of the perspective of all people together
3) and we also had a universal aproach in which spirituality and the question of WHY LIFE reach up to the GODS and back
As a very compelling example I remember Henk III with the story of Brahman : Brahman (or God) came into existance out of nothing and was ONE. Yet a desire to get to know him (herself) split him/her up. Out of the unity there was duality...
Aukje thought of the survival of our humankind. She was convinced that you could apply the survival of the fittest idea as an answer,...there was this selection and you could also see that in the economy. But now nature was fighting back as human kind had taken too much from nature.
Why are we here,...why is there life ? Because we must see who the winner is? Who is the fittest...Leaves me with the question : and then? What if we ever had a winner,....? What would happen to him or her? What would they do, say, preach or teach? Would life just end there and then?
Simone came with a very interesting thought. She started off with telling us that she did not know the answer. That was refreshing in the sense that it made space in people's head. People felt a blank space... an opening. If we are too full with our own thoughts there is not much room left for others or for real listening and sharing.
So what was her answer: we are here on earth in order to learn...from experience from choices,..things that happen to us that we have to accept...if individuals learn the world learns and turns with us,...in other words: The world as a whole develops if we learn...into a positive direction.
What a wonderful positive attitude and way to look at things. The question remains WHY? Why should we learn ?
And after very intensly repeating that question I heard an answer : Because there is some use in it. OK. SO that means there is a reason...and finally someone came up with the answer : It is all about wisdom....
What a good moment for a break...\\/\\\
After the break Henk II came with some interesting wisdom: For him it was clear that we had to reach some sort of perfection. Coming from a state of ignorance our path was clear...we need to reach perfection by reaching our own core. Like the center of an onion we need to find out who we truly are. We can also say that we need to make aquantance with the person that we are not. "Everything you see you cannot be."
HIII immediately commented on this: "But you need a whole life time for this!"
HII you can call it the divine spark.
When Aukje asked if that was the inner God in Henk II he replied that he did not want to name it.
Simone commented that if you get to that inner core of yourself, there is this emptiness...
HenkII There is emptiness and fullness,....knowing and not knowing,...answer and no answer
But was there not a reason to live on this planet to share it with others for this earth asked Simone.
Henk II replied that he did embrace the world,...it was an inner attitude.
Henk III remarked that HenkI was too fast. Everything that he said marked the end of a learning proces and we were right at the beginning.
Then Aukje replied that for her it was like a train. We learn and we travel in that train of life and somethimes it stops and we can step out and wait for the next train till we are ready for our following destination.
Joop was interested in the question wether this train only went ahead....was there an evolutionary thought behind it ?
TRYING to PULL the group back to the main topic : WHY is there life ?
Simone had a very interesting thought to share: If there was ever more knowledge/wisdom and awareness then the path to more UNITY is ready. It all was about ONENESS. Coming to each other to find more peace and harmony.
Erik saw a completely different aspect of the WHY question: He sees the world as a very fragile planet also because there are too many people and ever more people to be fed. In his eyes people were here to colonies this planet.
HenkIII agreed on this one. It was all about living according to instincts, people only thinking in their own reproduction. Henk thought that overpopulation was a taboo topic but that it was of course a risk for planet earth. But of course that was not the topic of the evening...But what he said about our topic made sense: Henk talked about balance. Balance with the world as a goal and answer to WHY we are on this planet and also a certain unity with oneself and the world around us.
Marthe said that she saw life also a teacher. She was incredibly greatful for what she can still do in life,...playing the piano for example. With this answer we would be back at the answer : Why are we here ? IN ORDER TO LEARN...!!!
There is some regularity in life and it is necessary to see this and to live with it (Henk II)...may we say to go with the flow?
Overall the discussion was very pleasant and we shared a lot of laughter and we heard many oppinions...the thing for me to improve maybe is to learn (!) to make people listen even better to what the other has just said so that we can build up argument instead of starting new thoughts with every new speaker.
The challenge for next time : Will we be able to make space for someone else's story without bringing in our own backpack of thoughts and experiences...or will that then be half the fun...?
What I will try to do next time when we are going to talk about "The good the bad and the... " is to really make people repeat what the other one has said....we are going to get deeper and deeper into each other's minds. We are going to take each other ever more seriously...we are going to understand each other ever better...we will learn to be more gentle with each other. And we are going to do it slowly....because a mind that rushes too fast can easily lose track of others.
Till then, thursday philosophy.
vrijdag 16 april 2010
Thursday, 15th April 2010
Topic of the evening : What is life?
In total we were ten people yesterday. A pleasant number to handle and get a good discussion started. Three Hs, M, I, A, J, D, E and myself as the discussion leader. Four women and six men.
It was my aim to narrow the topic down to the core interests of the group. Starting with some questions to get the brainstorm going, it very soon became clear that they mainly wanted to talk about life of human beings.
What is the limit of life ?
Where does life start ?
What is a sign of life ?
How does a human being / animal / plant feel life ?
Is there a better life ?
Are there possibilities to 'improve' life ?
Does a stone / sand / branch of a tree live ?
Where does life come from ?
What is the crown jewel of life ?
Do you have any association with life and dust ?
J started the evening when answering that he personally only saw it relevant to talk about man and life, since we could not know what for example a bird feels about life. Nor is it matter to talk about a stone and its life, because,...we as human beings can only do philosophy about ourselves. H 3 saw it totally different and made his point clear that even a stone has its life,...depending on what time range you looked at it. It was once upon a time fluid and thus "A-LIFE". H2 came with a definition of life : Life is everything that moves. Life is everlasting. Then someone shot out with another definition : Life is energy. E had even thought of a formula for life. And I hope that I can reconstruct his definition. For him life was also movement, but there was something else. Life of a human being had also to do with intensity. The greater the intensity the easier it was for a human being to move others. More life is being able to move more people. E brought a clear discrepancy into the discussion : For him there are people with more and people with less life,...more important people and less important people. H1 did not agree with this. Was it because it is against the human rights, where it says : All human beings are equal. When we look at what a crash of a polish president can do to a country in comparison to the hundreds and more children and grown up dying every day....well : Maybe E does have a very clear view of things...and maybe we want to have an illusion that we are all equal. E added that for him the formula E=MC2 could be seen as a clear cut definition of life. For me the question remained then. What has the greatest intensity...who can move most? M came up with a very interesting thought. For her it was very important to realise that life was changing and that life has different forms. So it was clear to her that illness for example can give a personal life a very unexpected twist.
From D we could hear that it was important to note that life of course began far before birth. And we all decided that we could also talk about life before fertilization, but that we found it more interesting to talk about the question of life after birth.
Life has very much to do with communication was a sort of a definition of H3. It is so important to see that life is always dependent on other factors. If there is no food or air to breath then we cannot talk of life. So talking of life or feeling life as being something that we can do alone, is pure nonsense. But well, what does it matter to be aware of that fact. Maybe it can change a personal life. In a time when we think that we can do so much alone, it can change a mind set in realising that we are entirely dependent on other people,...on air, on insects (that if they were not in our environment we would die; H1 even came with the example of the bats: if bats died out we human beings could not handle the amount of insects and so we would also die). We are so dependent, which is also a very good thing,...if we realise how dependent we are, our awareness of responsibility rises and we become better human beings.
E wanted to state that life always has to do with memory. And so a little discussion started on cells and DNA. Yes there is a sort of a memory in our cells, and is this always an indication that there is life. If we say that human life is always linked to memory, what about our childhood then...the first few years we know so little about. Well,...we could not answer this one...it remained a mystery.
D mentioned that it is interesting to see that life always runs in a certain chain. It is a circle of activities and things. Maybe a neverending story - an always developing chain of dependencies.
E came with the hint that life has always got to do with consciousness and that death is the disappearance of this consciousness. He was also convinced that life always has got to do with emotion.
H2 very quickly answered on this one. In his oppinion emotion came from lat. motion and that meant that e-motion clearly stated that there is no motion and thus no life.
Whether it is so easy I do not know. But of course I do know that there are states of mind where people do not have emotion,...or better they are practising to purify themselves of all emotion in order to become enlightened. For me it must then be very clear and it is necessary to add that love itself then is no emotion. It is a state of being that excells all other emotions and therefore is not part of the emotion discussion.
B R E A K
We had a break in which H1 and M came with the second round of tea and coffie and after the break I decided to try and get into deeper terrain and I hoped to leave the definition discussion behind. No matter what and how each one prefered to define life I believe in deeper discussions where people some times stop and listen,...before coming with a clear cut answer for every remark.
I read out loud a little story from a book called 'ZEN in everything'. The title was really where I was aiming for in this "life" discussion.
Zen sweeping
We can calmly say that the technology of brooms has not changed in the last few centuries. People have swept their floors since dust accumulates.
Human desire to sweep floors has come from more than just a wish for cleanliness. The action develops out of our intrinsic spirituality, that is what Zen masters say. 'Acts like sweeping the floor from dust of our rooms and cleaning leaves from our garden path all stand for "sweeping the dust of the world" from someone's head and heart, or in other words ascetism of worldly matters,'says Zen teamaster Soshitsu Sen XV. 'Acts of cleaning therfore enables you to feel purity and the holy essence of things, man and nature.'
One story of the Buddha talks about a meeting with a man called Sri. Sri's brother had given up on trying to teach him anything. Sri, who considered himself rather stupid, was in tears when he told the Buddha how he had tried to learn, but that he could not remember anything.
The Buddha gave him a broom and tin with the words : 'Sweep and clean. Every day. Do away with all the dust of the world.'
By repeating this simple action every day Sri became enlightened.
Every time that we clean our environment, we feel cleaner from the inside out. Zen is nothing more than repeating that excercise - day by day. One at a time. One huge clearance.
After reading there was a little silence that I really enjoyed as I sensed a way of getting deeper into the matter.
Another definition of life came : Life is being ONE with everything. How beautiful, I thought to myself.
We all decided that trying to answer the crown jewel question was tempting and so H2 opened the discussion again. "If I experience everything like as if it were for the first time, I leave behind the past. I become like a child that sees things just as they are without too much memory and false projections."
A' immediately added that this is the buddhist way of seeing it, namingly: unbiased living, without any prejudice. "Yes," exclaimed H2 "and it comes from an inner silence". It is living the inner awe, astonishment and allowing this surprise to happen every day again.
M just hinted, well that is when you are happy. And well, yes, I said: That brings us to the question "What is happiness?" Oh well, D, remarked: "...a good question and surely worthwhile a full other evening." Yes, he was right. We did not want to leave the original topic too much. But alas,...we had reached a certain turning point. We had reached something that was deep,...and something that moved everyone. I felt honesty.
So then I' came with an interesting personal observation in which she described a moment when she felt totally alive that is to say a moment of utter inspiration. She described it as a moment when she realized that her own qualities met the needs of others in her surrounding. And these moments were not pure and did not have anything to do with earning money or getting affirmation.
E doubted this statement as he critically remarked that also in this apperent ego less conduct deep down an ego was hidden as a driving force. But H2 thanked I' for her open personal story and found it a significant input for the evening.
So then we had reached a point of spiritual answers to the original question. We now were close to the answer of : Life is unconditional love
When I' asked J provokingly what he thought that life was he shortly answered in one word : Presence
E then referred to I's input and added that if you act unconditionally you can put in everything, which means for him - not being afraid of anything. What an interesting remark, I thought by myself. And I also hoped that all these precious thoughts and insights could be notted down so that we do not lose them. So now I sit here and write them down.
J then came with a little more critical remark again. He said that this unconditional living is something we can do if we already are in a comfort zone. And of course from somewhere in the room came the remark that of course philosophy was a luxury. Here I had to add the Socrates story. Oh yes, Socrates who gave his life for his philosophy long before people had ever heard of a name like Jesus or other heroes. He as a convinced philosopher believed that he was on the right path and drank the cup of poison given to him by the counsel. There was absolutely no convenience in that situation. He went for his faith unconditionally.
H 1 also came with an intersting story telling us of the many recipees that were written in concentration camps...a sign that also there with no convenience at all people could become very creative indeed.
And H 3 thought it important to share the idea that many children and people in slums of developing countries seem happier than we are in the rich countries. They seem to laugh more and are more free.
I' referred to H 1 's story of recipees in concentration camps when she said that yes it may as well be that there were creative minds but that it was only possible if there was already a basis of certain knowledge. She reminded us all of Mandela who came out of prison, became president without a deed of revenge whatsoever. But of course Mandela was a very creative and intelligent mind before being put into prison.
And yes of course Buddha himself left the wealth of his father, he broke free and landed hard in the other extreme. Poverty of the worst kind,...but then with total ascetism he could not find what he was lookin for either. He found his happiness meditating under the boddhi tree. Not a convenience store or a spa in a western luxury resort. Total openness and connectedness with mother nature. Mother earth that breathes through him and he obtained the breath of life from her. ONENESS...that is life.
H3 came up with a quote from the bible. "You will first be able to get an elephant through a needle hole than a rich man giving away his material wealth..." Jesus said.
Then H2 came with a conclusive and final question which for him is suitable as an answer to the crown jewel question. What is the crown jewel of life ? For him the core question should be : How do I reach ascetism ?
Not everyone agreed but somehow we all came to the notion that silence oneself is the important issue for a crown jewel life. So H2 suggested we held silence for two minutes. And we did. I could look at my notes and also check the clock. I noticed that not everyone enjoyed the silence but somehow I was convinced that it was a good exercise in bringing people together. And also : For me there is so much that happens in this silence,...I personally can read the silence and for me it is a prayer. And that is how I see this evening. Like a prayer. In my thoughts I repeat the feeling I love you all,...but it is not the mere words that make this feeling being transmitted. It is pure interest in other human beings.
After the silence I asked them if they wanted to share their final thougths and observations. Everyone wanted to say something about the evening:
1) I': She really enjoyed the diversity of thoughts in the group,...yes it was somehow incredible that people could approach "life" so differently
2) J: the evening turned out just the way he had expected it to be; this topic addresses more emotions; it is very different to the last session in which we talked about chaos and order...he thought it was a good thing
3) A: she made a very beautiful remark ; she had heard about the passion of simplicity which was new and worthwhile to her,...the sweeping broom story
4) H3: he was very pleased with the evening and thought it was a pity he had not heard about our gatherings before ; for the next meeting he suggested it interesting to investigate the question of : Why is there life? and I' wants to answer the question : Where does life lead us to ?
5) D: He had also attended the evening for the first time and thought it a very interesting evening, with which he could grow. He said that he had learned a lot.
6) H1: For H the quetion of ascetism remained very present in his mind and will keep him busy. He told us that when he goes on vacation with his camper there is absoulutely nothing that he misses...
So we all need that camper ;-)...
7) E: E said that he had learned from the evening and that this gave him a feeling of peace. He also thought it intersting that there were so many different oppinions.
8) H2: H noticed a definite difference before and after the break. He also suspected me to have done that on purpose...before the break he said people were busy with ventilating knowlede, definitions, etc. and after the break, after reading the story and focussing into the question of the crown jewel the evening gained in substance. The atmosphere relaxed and people became opener amongst each other. There was more feeling of trust and honest sharing.
Thank you H2.
9)M : M said that she could not follow everything but that it was not a problem for her. I told her that if there are moments when she wants the discussion to slow down she should tell me or give me a hint so that I can let people repeat what they have said.
10) M: My greatest joy this evening was that we laughed quite a lot. There were some misunderstandings which caused some funny moments and I personally love that. I am well aware of the fact that we handled an extremely wide topic but somehow we were talking about the same thing in the end and that is what I was aiming for. The feeling was right...people listened and yes there was respect for each and everyone. Some members of the group still state facts very strictly...maybe not giving enough room for others who have other oppinions. Well, I see my task as giving people a chance to talk and listen. I am not a teacher,...ya I admmit deep down I am a preacher and during the whole evening I do my prayer of love and respect.
I came out of this evening full with energy and somehow purified. I wish I could do it more often, ...but for the time being it is once a month. Thursday's philosophy.
In total we were ten people yesterday. A pleasant number to handle and get a good discussion started. Three Hs, M, I, A, J, D, E and myself as the discussion leader. Four women and six men.
It was my aim to narrow the topic down to the core interests of the group. Starting with some questions to get the brainstorm going, it very soon became clear that they mainly wanted to talk about life of human beings.
What is the limit of life ?
Where does life start ?
What is a sign of life ?
How does a human being / animal / plant feel life ?
Is there a better life ?
Are there possibilities to 'improve' life ?
Does a stone / sand / branch of a tree live ?
Where does life come from ?
What is the crown jewel of life ?
Do you have any association with life and dust ?
J started the evening when answering that he personally only saw it relevant to talk about man and life, since we could not know what for example a bird feels about life. Nor is it matter to talk about a stone and its life, because,...we as human beings can only do philosophy about ourselves. H 3 saw it totally different and made his point clear that even a stone has its life,...depending on what time range you looked at it. It was once upon a time fluid and thus "A-LIFE". H2 came with a definition of life : Life is everything that moves. Life is everlasting. Then someone shot out with another definition : Life is energy. E had even thought of a formula for life. And I hope that I can reconstruct his definition. For him life was also movement, but there was something else. Life of a human being had also to do with intensity. The greater the intensity the easier it was for a human being to move others. More life is being able to move more people. E brought a clear discrepancy into the discussion : For him there are people with more and people with less life,...more important people and less important people. H1 did not agree with this. Was it because it is against the human rights, where it says : All human beings are equal. When we look at what a crash of a polish president can do to a country in comparison to the hundreds and more children and grown up dying every day....well : Maybe E does have a very clear view of things...and maybe we want to have an illusion that we are all equal. E added that for him the formula E=MC2 could be seen as a clear cut definition of life. For me the question remained then. What has the greatest intensity...who can move most? M came up with a very interesting thought. For her it was very important to realise that life was changing and that life has different forms. So it was clear to her that illness for example can give a personal life a very unexpected twist.
From D we could hear that it was important to note that life of course began far before birth. And we all decided that we could also talk about life before fertilization, but that we found it more interesting to talk about the question of life after birth.
Life has very much to do with communication was a sort of a definition of H3. It is so important to see that life is always dependent on other factors. If there is no food or air to breath then we cannot talk of life. So talking of life or feeling life as being something that we can do alone, is pure nonsense. But well, what does it matter to be aware of that fact. Maybe it can change a personal life. In a time when we think that we can do so much alone, it can change a mind set in realising that we are entirely dependent on other people,...on air, on insects (that if they were not in our environment we would die; H1 even came with the example of the bats: if bats died out we human beings could not handle the amount of insects and so we would also die). We are so dependent, which is also a very good thing,...if we realise how dependent we are, our awareness of responsibility rises and we become better human beings.
E wanted to state that life always has to do with memory. And so a little discussion started on cells and DNA. Yes there is a sort of a memory in our cells, and is this always an indication that there is life. If we say that human life is always linked to memory, what about our childhood then...the first few years we know so little about. Well,...we could not answer this one...it remained a mystery.
D mentioned that it is interesting to see that life always runs in a certain chain. It is a circle of activities and things. Maybe a neverending story - an always developing chain of dependencies.
E came with the hint that life has always got to do with consciousness and that death is the disappearance of this consciousness. He was also convinced that life always has got to do with emotion.
H2 very quickly answered on this one. In his oppinion emotion came from lat. motion and that meant that e-motion clearly stated that there is no motion and thus no life.
Whether it is so easy I do not know. But of course I do know that there are states of mind where people do not have emotion,...or better they are practising to purify themselves of all emotion in order to become enlightened. For me it must then be very clear and it is necessary to add that love itself then is no emotion. It is a state of being that excells all other emotions and therefore is not part of the emotion discussion.
B R E A K
We had a break in which H1 and M came with the second round of tea and coffie and after the break I decided to try and get into deeper terrain and I hoped to leave the definition discussion behind. No matter what and how each one prefered to define life I believe in deeper discussions where people some times stop and listen,...before coming with a clear cut answer for every remark.
I read out loud a little story from a book called 'ZEN in everything'. The title was really where I was aiming for in this "life" discussion.
Zen sweeping
We can calmly say that the technology of brooms has not changed in the last few centuries. People have swept their floors since dust accumulates.
Human desire to sweep floors has come from more than just a wish for cleanliness. The action develops out of our intrinsic spirituality, that is what Zen masters say. 'Acts like sweeping the floor from dust of our rooms and cleaning leaves from our garden path all stand for "sweeping the dust of the world" from someone's head and heart, or in other words ascetism of worldly matters,'says Zen teamaster Soshitsu Sen XV. 'Acts of cleaning therfore enables you to feel purity and the holy essence of things, man and nature.'
One story of the Buddha talks about a meeting with a man called Sri. Sri's brother had given up on trying to teach him anything. Sri, who considered himself rather stupid, was in tears when he told the Buddha how he had tried to learn, but that he could not remember anything.
The Buddha gave him a broom and tin with the words : 'Sweep and clean. Every day. Do away with all the dust of the world.'
By repeating this simple action every day Sri became enlightened.
Every time that we clean our environment, we feel cleaner from the inside out. Zen is nothing more than repeating that excercise - day by day. One at a time. One huge clearance.
After reading there was a little silence that I really enjoyed as I sensed a way of getting deeper into the matter.
Another definition of life came : Life is being ONE with everything. How beautiful, I thought to myself.
We all decided that trying to answer the crown jewel question was tempting and so H2 opened the discussion again. "If I experience everything like as if it were for the first time, I leave behind the past. I become like a child that sees things just as they are without too much memory and false projections."
A' immediately added that this is the buddhist way of seeing it, namingly: unbiased living, without any prejudice. "Yes," exclaimed H2 "and it comes from an inner silence". It is living the inner awe, astonishment and allowing this surprise to happen every day again.
M just hinted, well that is when you are happy. And well, yes, I said: That brings us to the question "What is happiness?" Oh well, D, remarked: "...a good question and surely worthwhile a full other evening." Yes, he was right. We did not want to leave the original topic too much. But alas,...we had reached a certain turning point. We had reached something that was deep,...and something that moved everyone. I felt honesty.
So then I' came with an interesting personal observation in which she described a moment when she felt totally alive that is to say a moment of utter inspiration. She described it as a moment when she realized that her own qualities met the needs of others in her surrounding. And these moments were not pure and did not have anything to do with earning money or getting affirmation.
E doubted this statement as he critically remarked that also in this apperent ego less conduct deep down an ego was hidden as a driving force. But H2 thanked I' for her open personal story and found it a significant input for the evening.
So then we had reached a point of spiritual answers to the original question. We now were close to the answer of : Life is unconditional love
When I' asked J provokingly what he thought that life was he shortly answered in one word : Presence
E then referred to I's input and added that if you act unconditionally you can put in everything, which means for him - not being afraid of anything. What an interesting remark, I thought by myself. And I also hoped that all these precious thoughts and insights could be notted down so that we do not lose them. So now I sit here and write them down.
J then came with a little more critical remark again. He said that this unconditional living is something we can do if we already are in a comfort zone. And of course from somewhere in the room came the remark that of course philosophy was a luxury. Here I had to add the Socrates story. Oh yes, Socrates who gave his life for his philosophy long before people had ever heard of a name like Jesus or other heroes. He as a convinced philosopher believed that he was on the right path and drank the cup of poison given to him by the counsel. There was absolutely no convenience in that situation. He went for his faith unconditionally.
H 1 also came with an intersting story telling us of the many recipees that were written in concentration camps...a sign that also there with no convenience at all people could become very creative indeed.
And H 3 thought it important to share the idea that many children and people in slums of developing countries seem happier than we are in the rich countries. They seem to laugh more and are more free.
I' referred to H 1 's story of recipees in concentration camps when she said that yes it may as well be that there were creative minds but that it was only possible if there was already a basis of certain knowledge. She reminded us all of Mandela who came out of prison, became president without a deed of revenge whatsoever. But of course Mandela was a very creative and intelligent mind before being put into prison.
And yes of course Buddha himself left the wealth of his father, he broke free and landed hard in the other extreme. Poverty of the worst kind,...but then with total ascetism he could not find what he was lookin for either. He found his happiness meditating under the boddhi tree. Not a convenience store or a spa in a western luxury resort. Total openness and connectedness with mother nature. Mother earth that breathes through him and he obtained the breath of life from her. ONENESS...that is life.
H3 came up with a quote from the bible. "You will first be able to get an elephant through a needle hole than a rich man giving away his material wealth..." Jesus said.
Then H2 came with a conclusive and final question which for him is suitable as an answer to the crown jewel question. What is the crown jewel of life ? For him the core question should be : How do I reach ascetism ?
Not everyone agreed but somehow we all came to the notion that silence oneself is the important issue for a crown jewel life. So H2 suggested we held silence for two minutes. And we did. I could look at my notes and also check the clock. I noticed that not everyone enjoyed the silence but somehow I was convinced that it was a good exercise in bringing people together. And also : For me there is so much that happens in this silence,...I personally can read the silence and for me it is a prayer. And that is how I see this evening. Like a prayer. In my thoughts I repeat the feeling I love you all,...but it is not the mere words that make this feeling being transmitted. It is pure interest in other human beings.
After the silence I asked them if they wanted to share their final thougths and observations. Everyone wanted to say something about the evening:
1) I': She really enjoyed the diversity of thoughts in the group,...yes it was somehow incredible that people could approach "life" so differently
2) J: the evening turned out just the way he had expected it to be; this topic addresses more emotions; it is very different to the last session in which we talked about chaos and order...he thought it was a good thing
3) A: she made a very beautiful remark ; she had heard about the passion of simplicity which was new and worthwhile to her,...the sweeping broom story
4) H3: he was very pleased with the evening and thought it was a pity he had not heard about our gatherings before ; for the next meeting he suggested it interesting to investigate the question of : Why is there life? and I' wants to answer the question : Where does life lead us to ?
5) D: He had also attended the evening for the first time and thought it a very interesting evening, with which he could grow. He said that he had learned a lot.
6) H1: For H the quetion of ascetism remained very present in his mind and will keep him busy. He told us that when he goes on vacation with his camper there is absoulutely nothing that he misses...
So we all need that camper ;-)...
7) E: E said that he had learned from the evening and that this gave him a feeling of peace. He also thought it intersting that there were so many different oppinions.
8) H2: H noticed a definite difference before and after the break. He also suspected me to have done that on purpose...before the break he said people were busy with ventilating knowlede, definitions, etc. and after the break, after reading the story and focussing into the question of the crown jewel the evening gained in substance. The atmosphere relaxed and people became opener amongst each other. There was more feeling of trust and honest sharing.
Thank you H2.
9)M : M said that she could not follow everything but that it was not a problem for her. I told her that if there are moments when she wants the discussion to slow down she should tell me or give me a hint so that I can let people repeat what they have said.
10) M: My greatest joy this evening was that we laughed quite a lot. There were some misunderstandings which caused some funny moments and I personally love that. I am well aware of the fact that we handled an extremely wide topic but somehow we were talking about the same thing in the end and that is what I was aiming for. The feeling was right...people listened and yes there was respect for each and everyone. Some members of the group still state facts very strictly...maybe not giving enough room for others who have other oppinions. Well, I see my task as giving people a chance to talk and listen. I am not a teacher,...ya I admmit deep down I am a preacher and during the whole evening I do my prayer of love and respect.
I came out of this evening full with energy and somehow purified. I wish I could do it more often, ...but for the time being it is once a month. Thursday's philosophy.
Abonneren op:
Posts (Atom)
